Electronic mail messaging system and method

ABSTRACT

Systems and methods of confirming an addressee of an email message include receiving an email message addressed to one or more forwarding addresses. At least one email address associated with each of the one or more forwarding addresses is obtained. A potential discrepancy in the email message is detected in response to the at least one obtained email address. Before sending the email message, an alert is issued to a sender of the email message. The alert provides a recommendation regarding whether to continue with sending the email message and identifies content associated with the email message that led to detecting the potential discrepancy.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates generally to electronic mail messaging systems.

BACKGROUND

Some electronic mail messaging systems allow users to create aliases orgroups. When an email is addressed and sent to an alias or to a mailinglist, all users who are members of the alias or mailing list receive theemail. Aliases and mailing lists (referred to generally as forwardingaddresses) prove helpful because they assist users with sending an emailto a number of people without having to remember long email addresses orthe names of everyone in that mailing list. In addition, when a mailinglist is large, an email user needs only enter a single name into the‘To:’ field of the email message, rather than enter a long list ofnames, which takes time, care, and may introduce typing errors. An aliasor mailing list can be defined locally, that is, the alias or mailinglist applies only to the email user who generated it, or globally, thatis, to a larger audience of email users who have access to the alias ormailing list.

SUMMARY

In one aspect, the invention features a method of confirming anaddressee of an email message. An email message addressed to one or moreforwarding addresses is received. At least one email address associatedwith each of the one or more forwarding addresses is obtained. Apotential discrepancy in the email message is detected in response tothe at least one obtained email address. Before sending the emailmessage, an alert is issued to a sender of the email message. The alertprovides a recommendation regarding whether to continue with sending theemail message and identifies content associated with the email messagethat led to detecting the potential discrepancy.

In another aspect, the invention features a collaborative messagingsystem comprising a server computing system having a processor runningan email server and analytics program code. The email server receives anemail message addressed to one or more forwarding addresses and obtainsat least one email address associated with each of the one or moreforwarding addresses. The analytics program code detects a potentialdiscrepancy in the email message in response to the at least one emailaddress. The email server issues an alert to a sender of the emailmessage before sending the email message. The alert provides arecommendation regarding whether to continue with sending the emailmessage and identifies content associated with the email message thatled to detecting the potential discrepancy.

In another aspect, the invention features a computer program product forconfirming an addressee of an email message. The computer programproduct comprises a computer readable storage medium having computerreadable program code embodied therewith. The computer readable programcode comprises: computer readable program code configured to receive anemail message addressed to one or more forwarding addresses; computerreadable program code configured to obtain at least one email addressassociated with each of the one or more forwarding addresses; computerreadable program code configured to detect a potential discrepancy inthe email message in response to the at least one email address; andcomputer readable program code configured to issue an alert to a senderof the email message before sending the email message. The alertprovides a recommendation regarding whether to continue with sending theemail message and identifying content associated with the email messagethat led to detecting the potential discrepancy.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The above and further advantages of this invention may be betterunderstood by referring to the following description in conjunction withthe accompanying drawings, in which like numerals indicate likestructural elements and features in various figures. The drawings arenot necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed uponillustrating the principles of the invention.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an embodiment of a collaborative messagingsystem having a plurality of client devices in communication with aserver computing system over a network.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram representation of an embodiment of the servercomputing system.

FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of an embodiment of a process for confirming anaddressee of an email.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Applicants recognized a source of a potential information leak when anemail recipient replies to an email message addressed to an alias or toa group (also referred to as a mailing list or a distribution list). Acommon response to receiving an email message addressed to multiplerecipients, such as to an alias or to a group, is for the user to sendthe “reply to all.” After the user starts to prepare the reply, the nameof the group or alias automatically appears as an addressee. Thisautomatic addressing occurs without any validation of the group or aliasin the “To:” or “cc” addressee fields; that is, there is nodetermination whether the group or alias in such fields is actually thesame as the group or alias to which the first email was initially sent.Consequently, the wrong individuals might receive the reply. Further,confidential information might be sent to the wrong individuals simplybecause an auto-completion feature of the email system picked the firstmatching cached string to add to the “To:” or “cc:” addressee fields inthe email.

Collaborative messaging systems described herein include safeguards thatensure email messages are sent to the proper individuals when the useraddresses an email to a group list or to an email alias or uses emailauto-completion to fill in an email address. The safeguards entailcomparisons between local mailing lists and global mailing lists anddetailed alerts that inform the user about the choice being made whenmemberships of the compared lists do not match. An alert can require theuser to choose between two groups or to confirm the current groupselection. Sufficient information accompanies the alert to enable theuser to make an informed decision. Other safeguards look forinconsistencies between the addressees of an email message and emailcontent or between memberships of multiple group lists presented in anemail.

FIG. 1 shows an example of a collaborative messaging system 10 includinga plurality of client electronic devices 12-1, 12-2, 12-N (generally,clients 12) in communication with a server computing system 14 over anetwork 18. Exemplary implementations of the clients 12 include, but arenot limited to, personal computers (PC), Macintosh computers,workstations, laptop computers, kiosks, hand-held devices, such as apersonal digital assistant (PDA), cellular phones, smartphones, AppleiPads™, Amazon KINDLEs®, navigation and global positioning systems, andnetwork terminals. Also connected to the network 18 is an informationserver system 20.

The client 12-1 includes a processor 22 in communication with memory 24over a communication bus 26. Client 12-1 is generally representative ofthe various clients 12 connected to the network, although some of theclients, depending on the type of device, may lack some of thecomponents or have additional or different components from thosedescribed in connection with client 12-1. The memory 24 includesnon-volatile computer storage media, such as read-only memory (ROM) 28,and volatile computer storage media, such as random-access memory (RAM)30. Typically stored in the ROM 28 is a basic input/output system(BIOS), which contains program code for controlling basic operations ofthe client 12-1 including start-up of the computing device andinitialization of hardware. Stored within the RAM 30 are program codeand data. Program code includes, but is not limited to, applicationprograms 32, program modules 34 (e.g., browser plug-ins), and anoperating system 36 (e.g., Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows NT 4.0,Windows XP, Windows 2000, Vista, Windows 7, Linux, and Macintosh,Windows Mobile™, Mobile Linux™, Symbian OS™, Palm OS™, Mobile OS™, andAndroid™). One such application program 32 is an email client program40. The email client program 40 can be any proprietary email clientprogram or any commercially available email client program, for example,Lotus NOTES™, Google Mail, Yahoo email, and Microsoft OUTLOOK™. Otherapplication programs 32 can include, but are not limited to, browsers,instant messaging programs, and office applications, such asspreadsheet, word processor, and slide presentation software.

Typically, the communication bus 26 connects the processor 22 to variousother components of the client 12-1 including, for example, a user-inputinterface, a memory interface, a peripheral interface, a videointerface, a local network interface, and a wide-area network interface(not shown). A display screen 42 connects to the communication bus 26through the video interface. Exemplary implementations of thecommunication bus include, but are not limited to, a PeripheralComponent Interconnect (PCI) bus, an Industry Standard Architecture(ISA) bus, an Enhanced Industry Standard Architecture (EISA) bus, and aVideo Electronics Standards Association (VESA) bus. Over a wire orwireless link, the user-input interface is in communication with one ormore user-input devices, e.g., a keyboard, a mouse, trackball,touch-pad, touch-screen, microphone, joystick, by which a user can enterinformation and commands into the client 12-1.

Embodiments of the network 18 include, but are not limited to,local-area networks (LAN), metro-area networks (MAN), and wide-areanetworks (WAN), such as the Internet or World Wide Web. Each client 12can connect to the server system 14 over the network 18 through one of avariety of connections, such as standard telephone lines, digitalsubscriber line (DSL), asynchronous DSL, LAN or WAN links (e.g., T1,T3), broadband connections (Frame Relay, ATM), satellite, and wirelessconnections (e.g., 802.11(a), 802.11(b), 802.11(g)). The servercomputing system 14 includes an email server program 44 for transferringelectronic mail messages from sender clients to recipient clients.

The information server 20 generally provides information-gatheringservices. In one embodiment, the information server 20 includes a LDAPserver that provides a directory service for accessing membershipinformation stored in LDAP repositories. In other embodiments, theinformation server 20 has access to various other types of informationin, for example, LDAP-like databases, relational databases, proprietarydatabases. The server 20 can also have access to external systems thatstore hierarchical data. Examples of such external systems include, butare not limited to, a custom user registry, flat files, or any otherrepository.

FIG. 2 shows an embodiment of the server computing system 14 including ahardware layer 60 and an operating system 64. A network interface 68connects the server computing system 14 to the network 18. The hardwarelayer 60 includes a processor 72 and memory 76. Running on the operatingsystem 64 is the mail server 44 (FIG. 1) in communication with ananalytics engine 80. The analytics engine 80 can be incorporated as partof the mail server 44.

In brief overview, the analytics engine 80 examines each email,analyzing the email for potential discrepancies among the addresseeslisted in the ‘To:’, ‘cc:’, and ‘bcc:’ addressee fields. Before an emailcan be sent, the analytics engine 80 parses the ‘To:’, ‘cc:’, and ‘bcc:’addressee fields, the subject line, attachments, and the textual contentin the email body.

As part of its analysis, the analytics engine 80 looks for whether anaddressee corresponds to an alias or a group list. Group lists can belocal or global. A local group list is personal to a particular user,being generated by that user, containing email addresses of memberschosen by that user, having a local group name given by that user, andbeing accessible to that user only. Global groups can be generated byany user, contain email addresses of members chosen by its authoringuser, be given a name by that user, and be accessible generally to anyuser or to a particular set of users of the collaborative messagingsystem. When resolving group names to email addresses, local group listshave precedence over global group lists. The same precedence holds forlocal aliases over global aliases. As used herein, a forwarding addresspreferably encompasses alias addresses and group lists.

Several different email-addressing situations pose potentialdiscrepancies to be watched for by the analytics engine 80. In each ofthese situations, the sender of the initial email is using a mailinglist (either local or global). When the replier starts to prepare areply to the initial email, the mailing list automatically appears as anaddressee. If either a local group list of the replier or a global grouplist accessible to the replier is used to resolve the addresses of themailing list, the analytics engine 80 operates to validate use of thatgroup list before the email can be sent.

In one situation, the sender uses a local group list when sending aninitial email and the replier has a local group list with the same groupname when sending a reply email. Despite having the same group names,the membership of the two local group lists are different from eachother. As a consequence, the replier would be sending a reply email to adifferent group of people from the group who received the initial email.To prevent such a possibility, the collaborative messaging system bringsthe membership of the replier's local group list to the replier'sattention and requires confirmation before the reply email can be sent,as described in more detail below.

As another situation, the sender uses a local group list when sending aninitial email and the replier does not have a local group list with thesame name as the sender's group list. However, the mail server has aglobal group list with the same group name but different groupmembership from that of the sender's local group list. As a consequence,the mail server 44 resolves the group name in the reply email to theaddressees in the global group list. The replier would again be sendinga reply email to a different group of people from the group who receivedthe initial email. To prevent this possibility, the collaborativemessaging system brings the membership of the global group list to thereplier's attention and requires confirmation before the reply email canbe sent, as described in more detail below.

As yet another situation, the sender uses a global group list whensending an initial email. The replier has a local group list with thesame name but different group membership as the sender's group list, andthe mail server has a global group list with the same name and the samegroup membership as the sender's group list. Because the replier's localgroup list has precedence over the mail server's global group listduring email address resolution, the replier would be sending a replyemail to a different group of people from the group who received thesender's initial email. To prevent this possibility, the analyticsengine 80 compares the membership of the replier's local group list withthe membership of the mail server's global group list, and, finding adiscrepancy, induces the mail server to send the replier an alertshowing the memberships of both group lists, and requiring a groupselection and confirmation before the reply email can be sent, asdescribed in more detail below.

As still another situation, the sender uses a local group list whensending an initial email, but neither the replier nor the mail serverhas a local group list or a global group list, respectively, with thesame name as the sender's local group list. Consequently, the group namein the reply email cannot be resolved to any email addresses. In thisevent, the collaborative messaging system sends an alert to the replierspecifying the inability to find an addressee and providing details ofthe cause of the discrepancy, such as, for example, ‘No such local orglobal group name as . . . ’ or “No such alias as . . . ”. In addition,the collaborative messaging system provides a suggestion orrecommendation for correcting the discrepancy.

As yet another situation, the sender uses a global group list whensending an initial email but the replier does not have access to thatglobal group list. In addition, the replier does not have a local grouplist with the same name. In this instance, the group name in the replyemail cannot be resolved to any email addresses (there being no localgroup list or accessible global group list accessible to the replier).In this event, the collaborative messaging system sends an alert to thereplier specifying the inability to find an addressee and providingdetails of the cause of the discrepancy. The alert may further mentionthat a global group list exists by the same name used by the replier,but that the replier's email account is not currently configured to useit. Again, the collaborative messaging system can provide a suggestionor recommendation for correcting the discrepancy.

As examples of other analysis that may be performed to look fordiscrepancies associated with the use of aliases and group lists, theanalytics engine 80 can also compare the content of an email with pastemails or threads that have been communicated previously to the group oralias addressed in the email. If the content of the email appears to bea novel topic (a topic hitherto not discussed between the sender and thealias or a threshold number of the group members), the analytics engine80 can consider this to be a discrepancy to be brought to the sender'sattention.

The analytics engine 80 can also evaluate whether the content of theemail is consistent with the designated group or alias. For example,consider that one group list in the email includes email addresses ofemployees of Company A, and the analytics engine 80 finds in the body ofthe email the words “IBM Confidential.” Because, in this example,company A may not be privy to IBM confidential information, theanalytics engine 80 can consider this to be a discrepancy to be broughtto the sender's attention.

The analytics engine 80 can compare group membership between multiplegroup lists presented as addressees in an email and evaluate whether theaddressing of different groups in the same email poses a discrepancy.For example, consider that the email includes a first group listcorresponding to email addresses of corporate executives and a secondgroup list corresponding to entry-level employees. For the purposes ofsuch types of determinations, the analytics engine 80 is incommunication with an LDAP server to query, in real time, into a LDAPhierarchical system and to find therefrom relationships among themembers of the different groups. The analytics engine 80 can beconfigured to consider the disparity among members in the differentgroups as a discrepancy to be brought to the sender's attention.

The aforementioned situations analyzed by the analytics engine 80 areintended as examples; the analytics engine 80 can detect other types ofsituations posing potential discrepancies from those described.

In response to encountering any of the above situations, the analyticsengine 80 induces the email server 44 to produce an alert that describesthe detected discrepancy. The alert can highlight the portion of theemail's content that provoked the discrepancy and specifically explainthe rationale behind the alert. For example, the alert can state, “Thesubject line says IBM confidential, but the addressees include anexecutive group at another company,” or, “This email is addressed toexecutives of the corporation and to entry-level employees. One or bothgroup lists may be incorrect.” The alert can include a recommendationregarding whether or not the email should be sent based on the nature,number, and perceived severity of any discrepancies detected. When theinstance warrants, a recommendation can include a positive notice ofthere being no discrepancies found.

As another example, the alert can include a list of the members of thegroup and their email addresses (as currently presented in the email)and request confirmation before sending the email. If there are multiplegroups with the same name (i.e., a local group and a global group), theanalytics engine 80 can list the members of each group and require thereplier to select one of the two groups.

In addition, the analytics engine 80 can provide a recommendation as towhich group to use and evaluate the sender's selection. If the analyticsengine 80 concludes the user has made an incorrect choice, a subsequentalert explains to the sender why the selection is thought to be anerror, and asks the sender to confirm the choice again. For example, thesender may choose the group list that includes the entry-level employeesover the executive group list, but the analytics engine 80 determinesthat one email attachment pertains to an annual report to be presentedto stockholders of the corporation. In this instance, the analyticsengine 80 may conclude that the sender's selection is inconsistent withthe content of the email.

FIG. 3 shows an embodiment of a process 100 for confirming addressees ofan email message before the email message may be sent. In oneembodiment, the email message is a reply email written by a user who isreplying to earlier email that the user received. In other embodiments,the email message is a forwarding email or an initial email. Typically,for reply emails, the collaborative messaging system automatically fillsthe ‘To:’ addressee field with the email address of the sender of theinitial email. In addition, if the email recipient chose to reply toall, the email system also automatically fills the “cc:” addressee fieldwith the other addressees of the initial email. For initial andforwarding emails, the user typically types in the addressees into the‘To:’ and, optionally, into the ‘cc:’ and ‘bcc:’ fields. Conceivably,the user may enter an erroneous alias or group name. For example, anauto-completion feature of the email system may supply the erroneousalias or group name, which the user unwittingly selects. Or the user maysimply enter an alias or group name erroneously believing it to becorrect. In each of the embodiments, after entering the addresses, thesender sends the email. The email server 44 of the server computingsystem 14 receives (step 102) the email.

Before sending the email on to its addressees, the collaborativemessaging system determines (step 104) whether any of the address fieldscontains an alias or a group list. If there are no aliases or grouplists in the email, the collaborative messaging system sends (step 106)the email to the email addresses in the address fields.

If an alias or group list is found, the email system determines (step112) whether that alias or group list is available. For example, somecollaborative messaging systems maintain a cache of aliases and grouplists of previously delivered email messages. If the collaborativemessaging system is able to retrieve the alias or group list from cache,the corresponding email addresses are resolved based on the listretrieved from cache, and the collaborative messaging system sends (step106) the email to the resolved email addresses.

If, instead, the collaborative messaging system cannot retrieve thealias or group list from cache, the collaborative messaging systemattempts (step 116) to find the alias or group list in the local addressbook of the user who is sending the email. If found, the collaborativemessaging system analyzes the email, looking for discrepancies,including whether a global list by the same name exists at the mailserver. The collaborative messaging system invokes (step 118) an alertthat can include the email address of the alias or the member(s) in thefound local group list. Even if no discrepancies are found, theanalytics engine 80 can include this finding of no discrepancies in thealert. Additionally, the collaborative messaging system can ask the userto confirm (step 110) whether to send the email. Upon confirmation, theemail is sent (step 106) or ended (step 120) without sending.

The alert and confirmation process can take on additional complexity ifa global list is found by the same name as the local list. In thisevent, the collaborative messaging system can list the membership ofboth groups in the alert and request that the user make a choice. Aspreviously described, the alert can contain a recommendation as to whichgroup to choose, and the collaborative messaging system can challengethe user with yet another alert if the email system concludes that thewrong choice was made. This heightened level of challenge andconfirmation should improve the quality of the sender's choice, whetherto confirm, correct and confirm, or simply end the email process.

If, instead, the alias or group list is not found in the local addressbook, the collaborative messaging system attempts (step 122) to find thealias or group list in a global distribution list at the mail server. Iffound, the collaborative messaging system analyzes (step 124) andinvokes an alert that can include the email address of the aliases or ofthe member(s) in the found global distribution list. If, instead, thealias or group list is not found in the global distribution list, theemail system invokes (step 126) another type of alert indicating failureto find the addressee and providing guidance regarding the possiblecause for problem. The collaborative messaging system also analyzes theemail in order to present a suggestion or recommendation for correctingthe problem. Additionally, the collaborative messaging system asks theuser to confirm (step 110) whether to send the email (presumably, afterthe appropriate correction has been made).

Although primarily described herein in the context of reply emails, someof the principles of looking for discrepancies among addressees applyalso to initial emails and forwarded email. For example, looking fordisparities between group memberships of those group names in the email;checking for novel subject matter with respect to specific addresses;and checking for inconsistencies between group members and the emailcontent, are examples of concepts that are not limited to reply emails,but apply to initial email and forwarding emails.

As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, aspects of the presentinvention may be embodied as a system, method, or computer programproduct. Accordingly, aspects of the present invention may take the formof an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment(including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or anembodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may allgenerally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.”Furthermore, aspects of the present invention may take the form of acomputer program product embodied in one or more computer readablemedium(s) having computer readable program code embodied thereon.

Any combination of one or more computer readable medium(s) may beutilized. The computer readable medium may be a computer readable signalmedium or a computer readable storage medium. A computer readablestorage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electronic,magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system,apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. Morespecific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the computer readablestorage medium would include the following: an electrical connectionhaving one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk,RAM, ROM, an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flashmemory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disc read-only memory(CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or anysuitable combination of the foregoing. In the context of this document,a computer readable storage medium may be any tangible medium that cancontain, or store a program for use by or in connection with aninstruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

A computer readable signal medium may include a propagated data signalwith computer readable program code embodied therein, for example, inbaseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a propagated signal may takeany of a variety of forms, including, but not limited to,electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable combination thereof. Acomputer readable signal medium may be any computer readable medium thatis not a computer readable storage medium and that can communicate,propagate, or transport a program for use by or in connection with aninstruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

Program code embodied on a computer readable medium may be transmittedusing any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless,wire-line, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination ofthe foregoing.

Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of thepresent invention may be written in any combination of one or moreprogramming languages, including an object oriented programming languagesuch as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like and conventional proceduralprogramming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similarprogramming languages.

Aspects of the present invention are described below with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer program instructions. These computer program instructions maybe provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, specialpurpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus toproduce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via theprocessor of the computer or other programmable data processingapparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified inthe flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.

These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computerreadable medium that can direct a computer, other programmable dataprocessing apparatus, or other devices to function in a particularmanner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readablemedium produce an article of manufacture including instructions whichimplement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer,other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to causea series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, otherprogrammable apparatus or other devices to produce a computerimplemented process such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer or other programmable apparatus provide processes forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods, and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portionof code, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be notedthat, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in theblock may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, twoblocks shown in succession may be executed substantially concurrently,or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverse order, dependingupon the functionality involved. It will also be noted that each blockof the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations ofblocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can beimplemented by special purpose hardware-based systems that perform thespecified functions or acts, or combinations of special purpose hardwareand computer instructions.

While the invention has been shown and described with reference tospecific preferred embodiments, it should be understood by those skilledin the art that various changes in form and detail may be made thereinwithout departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as definedby the following claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of confirming an addressee of an emailmessage, the method comprising: receiving an email message addressed toone or more forwarding addresses that include a local mailing list;identifying a global mailing list with a duplicate name as a name of thelocal mailing list; considering the identification of the global mailinglist with the duplicate name as the name of the local mailing list to bea potential discrepancy in the email message and detecting the potentialdiscrepancy by determining that content of the email message isinappropriate for one or more members of the local mailing list; andissuing, before sending the email message, an alert to a sender of theemail message in response to the potential discrepancy in the emailmessage, the alert providing a recommendation regarding whether tocontinue with sending the email message.
 2. The method of claim 1,further comprising displaying in the alert each member of the localmailing list to the sender of the email message.
 3. The method of claim1, further comprising requesting in the alert that the sender of theemail message select between the local mailing list and the globalmailing list.
 4. The method of claim 3, further comprising providing arecommendation in the alert as to which of the mailing lists to choose.5. The method of claim 4, further comprising issuing a second alert uponconcluding the sender of the email message has selected a wrong mailinglist of the two mailing lists.
 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the oneor more forwarding addresses includes multiple mailing lists, andwherein detecting the potential discrepancy in the email messageincludes comparing membership of one of the multiple mailing lists withmembership of another of the multiple mailing lists; and finding, inresponse to the comparison, that sending the email message to themultiple mailing lists presents an inconsistency.
 7. The method of claim1, further comprising: obtaining at least one email address associatedwith each of the one or more forwarding addresses; and analyzing one ormore past email messages between the sender and the at least one emailaddress; and wherein detecting the potential discrepancy in the emailmessage includes determining that content of the email message presentsa novel topic of communication between the sender and the at least oneemail address.
 8. A collaborative messaging system comprising: a servercomputing system having a processor running an email server andanalytics program code, the email server receiving an email messageaddressed to one or more forwarding addresses that include a localmailing list, the analytics program code identifying a global mailinglist with a duplicate name as a name of the local mailing list andconsidering the identification of the global mailing list with theduplicate name as the name of the local mailing list to be a potentialdiscrepancy in the email message and detecting the potential discrepancyby the analytics program code determining that content of the emailmessage is inappropriate for one or more members of the local mailinglist, the email server issuing, in response to the potentialdiscrepancy, an alert to a sender of the email message before sendingthe email message, the alert providing a recommendation regardingwhether to continue with sending the email message.
 9. The collaborativemessaging system of claim 8, wherein the alert includes each member ofthe local mailing list to the sender of the email message.
 10. Thecollaborative messaging system of claim 8, wherein the alert requeststhat the sender of the email message select between the local mailinglist and the global mailing list.
 11. The collaborative messaging systemof claim 10, wherein the alert provides recommendation as to which ofthe mailing lists to choose.
 12. The collaborative messaging system ofclaim 8, wherein the one or more forwarding addresses includes multiplemailing lists, and wherein the potential discrepancy is detected by theanalytics program code comparing membership of one of the multiplemailing lists with membership of another of the multiple mailing lists,and finding, in response to the comparison, that sending the emailmessage to members of the multiple mailing lists presents aninconsistency.
 13. The collaborative messaging system of claim 8,wherein the analytics program code obtains at least one email addressassociated with each of the one or more forwarding addresses, analyzesone or more past email messages between the sender and the at least oneemail address, and detects the potential discrepancy in the emailmessage by determining that content of the email message presents anovel topic of communication between the sender and the at least oneemail address.
 14. A computer program product for confirming anaddressee of an email message, the computer program product comprising:a computer readable non-transitory storage medium having computerreadable program code embodied therewith, the computer readable programcode comprising: computer readable program code configured to receive anemail message addressed to one or more forwarding addresses that includea local mailing list; computer readable program code configured toidentify a global mailing list with a duplicate name as a name of thelocal mailing list and to consider the identification of the globalmailing list with the duplicate name as the local mailing list to be apotential discrepancy in the email message, and to detect that thepotential discrepancy in the email message includes computer-readableprogram code configured to determine that content of the email messageis inappropriate for one or more members of the local mailing list; andcomputer readable program code configured to issue, in response to thepotential discrepancy, an alert to a sender of the email message beforesending the email message, the alert providing a recommendationregarding whether to continue with sending the email message andidentifying the global mailing list with the duplicate name as the localmailing list.
 15. The computer program product of claim 14, furthercomprising computer readable program code configured to display in thealert each member of the local mailing list to the sender of the emailmessage.
 16. The computer program product of claim 14, furthercomprising computer-readable program code configured to request in thealert that the sender of the email message select between the localmailing list and the global mailing list.
 17. The computer programproduct of claim 16, further comprising computer-readable program codeconfigured to provide a recommendation in the alert as to which of themailing lists to choose.
 18. The computer program product of claim 14,wherein the one or more forwarding addresses includes multiple mailinglists, and wherein the computer-readable program code configured todetect the potential discrepancy in the email message includes:computer-readable program code configured to compare membership of oneof the multiple mailing lists with membership of another of the multiplemailing lists; and computer-readable program code configured to find, inresponse to the comparison, that sending the email message to themultiple mailing lists presents an inconsistency.
 19. The computerprogram product of claim 14, further comprising: computer readableprogram code configured to obtain at least one email address associatedwith each of the one or more forwarding addresses; and computer-readableprogram code configured to analyze one or more past email messagesbetween the sender and the at least one email address; and wherein thecomputer-readable program code configured to detect the potentialdiscrepancy in the email message includes computer-readable program codeconfigured to determine that content of the email message presents anovel topic of communication between the sender and the at least oneemail address.